Virginia's newest lame duck

Mr. McDonnell, another victim of an archaic system

Discussion Policy
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
Sunday, November 8, 2009

AMID POMP and ceremony, receptions and balls, a church service and a parade, Robert F. McDonnell's inauguration as Virginia's 71st chief executive will take place next Jan. 16 in Richmond, whereupon he will become . . . a lame duck.

This is screwy, illogical and ill-advised, but it's the plain truth in Virginia, the only state where a governor is constitutionally barred from serving two consecutive terms. Advocates of changing the rule include scholars, lawmakers, business groups and four of the past five governors (plus Mr. McDonnell himself), but repeated legislative attempts to do so have failed, leaving Virginia and its top elected official stuck with a system as archaic as a tricorn hat.

Mr. McDonnell, the governor-elect by dint of his victory in Tuesday's election, is not only prohibited from seeking reelection at the conclusion of his term in 2014. He will also have to govern, for the first two years of his term, from a blueprint based on the biennial budget of his term-limited predecessor, Gov. Timothy M. Kaine. That Mr. Kaine is a Democrat, and Mr. McDonnell a Republican, makes this all the more awkward, though it may provide Mr. McDonnell a useful means of deflecting criticism about the effects of sharp cuts in state spending and services. Not until 2012 will Mr. McDonnell have a chance to craft the one budget of his governorship that he will both propose and fully administer.

The arguments against changing the system are thin as a reed -- that the governor's powers are already too broad; that governors would become too susceptible to the corrupting influence of campaign contributions; and that governors would become distracted by their reelection campaigns. But 49 other states have managed to grasp that governors intent on reelection may be more accountable to voters; that voters can choose not to reelect if they so desire; and that it's extremely difficult to build momentum for major initiatives if governors and cabinet secretaries are all swapped out of office every four years. The status quo prompts incumbents to start looking for new jobs, or doing them, even before they leave the governor's mansion. Both Mr. Kaine, and former governor James S. Gilmore III before him, took up the reins of their respective parties' national committees while still in office.

If a reform is agreed to and passed by the General Assembly in consecutive sessions, as the state constitution requires, it could be on the ballot as a referendum as soon as 2012. And if voters approve, then the governor elected in 2013 would have the option of running for reelection in 2017. That would strike a blow for good government in the commonwealth, and if Mr. McDonnell embraces the initiative, it would be a feather in his cap.



© 2009 The Washington Post Company